The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

Defendant

In addition, a person who requests an attachment order shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three years of imprisonment with labor for a two-year grace period) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s exemption from disclosure and notification orders is unreasonable in light of the fact that the instant crime itself is serious and its nature is inferior.

C. It is unreasonable for the court below to dismiss the request for the attachment order of this case, even though the defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “the defendant”) are likely to repeat a crime.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing, there is little possibility of criticism in that the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the punishment once a fine was already imposed on the same kind of crime, and without being aware of it again, because he committed the instant crime.

In addition, even though the victim suffered a lot of mental impulse and pain due to the crime of this case, the defendant was not able to have the victim attend the trial.

In this regard, it can be said that the defendant should be punished strictly.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime; (b) the Defendant did not commit the said crime by means of threatening the victim by taking advantage of the excessive nature itself; and (c) the Defendant’s position to care for the children of Grade II intellectual disability as well as the circumstances favorable to the Defendant; and (d) other circumstances revealed in the instant pleadings, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, background and degree of the crime; and (e) the recommended form prescribed by the Supreme Court’s Sentencing Committee, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

B. As to the unjust assertion of exemption from disclosure and notification order, the lower court committed the Defendant’s act of indecent act on the part of the Defendant at the time of the crime.